I really do like the idea of the technicals/ball back, but it's so hard to catch in game.
Maybe just the risk of being caught would cut back on the flops.

The weird thing about basketball too though, is that the rules almost encourage flopping. To draw a charge, you can't move your feet back, you have to just fall. This creates such a thin line that's almost impossible to see during a game.

I have always equated it to an unsportsmanlike penalty. If a ref can determine that a foul is a flagrant 1 or 2, they should be able to call a flop. As they do with flagrant calls, the refs can confer with each other before making the call. If the league wants to review games and find flops afterwards, then they can levy fines. But it should be an in game penalty and treated as a technical. If they can call a delay of game penalty, why are they letting this go?

I have always equated it to an unsportsmanlike penalty. If a ref can determine that a foul is a flagrant 1 or 2, they should be able to call a flop. As they do with flagrant calls, the refs can confer with each other before making the call. If the league wants to review games and find flops afterwards, then they can levy fines. But it should be an in game penalty and treated as a technical. If they can call a delay of game penalty, why are they letting this go?

Also if refs are skewing the game they don't skew it so the favourite wins, that makes no sense. You either affect the over/under or if you're getting paid off by anyone that matters it's to make the underdog cover but not win.

Also if refs are skewing the game they don't skew it so the favourite wins, that makes no sense. You either affect the over/under or if you're getting paid off by anyone that matters it's to make the underdog cover but not win.

Thanks. I guess Donaghy needs glasses if he can't tell the difference between a 1 and a 7. There's a ref joke somewhere in there.

Then get a 4th Ref watching all the angles from another room who can overturn whistles as inadvertent/reverse calls/tell them when they need to review. Id rather the NBA be more based on REALITY than a smoother game.

I agree with this. I might modify it in this way however: allow coaches to challenge three calls per half. When a player feels a wrong call was made then he can immediately let his coach know and the coach can challenge, up to three per half. The players will be more careful about displaying disbelief because it might result in a wasted challenge from coach. Other than the coach making a challenge, the refs can call a tech for any talk back. As much as the Sac commentators sucked, they had a point that it was better when players couldn't say a word to the refs without picking up a tech.

There have been a few games where it seemed like the refs were making it impossible to Toronto to win and I felt like if it were me I'd take my team off the court. That might be a bit much but in the Sac game I would have had them just stand in front of the bench (on court) and wait for time to expire.

Donaghy on 1050 this morning

Anyone catch it? I only caught some. It was fascinating. Yeah, you have to take it with a grain of salt but some facts ate facts. He said the league likes playoff series to be drawn out (more $). In game sixes reffed by dick bavetta, 50% went on to game seven. In game sixes not reffed by him it's more like 24% that go on to 7. Weird stuff like that.

Anyone catch it? I only caught some. It was fascinating. Yeah, you have to take it with a grain of salt but some facts ate facts. He said the league likes playoff series to be drawn out (more $). In game sixes reffed by dick bavetta, 50% went on to game seven. In game sixes not reffed by him it's more like 24% that go on to 7. Weird stuff like that.